So, Arndt's Oblivion isn't gaining much positive press. (He's listed as one of several screenplay writers, though, so I'm not sure how much power he had.) I'm a fan of both Toy Story 3 and Little Miss Sunshine, but am a little concerned with many of the reviews saying that it is poorly written romance *and* poorly written sci-fi...

So I'm guessing that the overall reception to SW7 will be similar to Star Trek 2009 *since this is JJ we're dealing with. Now this is assuming the film is good* so it might be like this: Critics and audiences will praise the new cast's acting *the OT cast is up for debate as of now*, the visuals, action and pure emotions but the major critisism will be of the story *like saying its a copy of another story, or whateves* and for not having the greatest of villains *most likely due to the fact that its hard to live up to the Vader legacy* . General audiences will probably love it but fans will be definitly be split *look at the star trek fans for reference*. I also see some controversy over the inevitable twist *most likely being either a OT character death *which BTW...JJ Abrams is not afraid to kill off classic things so the OT cast aren't safe cause they're famous* Or the reveal of one character to actually be another. The film will totally make tons of money and we'll see soo many toys that we'll be flooded with them.

Kennedy said Base FX is expected to play a role in future Lucasfilm productions, among them the three upcoming installments of the Star Wars franchise. “The Star Wars universe is full of technological and cutting-edge effects, which Base FX will be a wonderful partner to create with,” she said at the ceremony.

"It’s been 30 years since we last saw Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia in Return of the Jedi. The trio were youthful, attractive and iconic figures who were branded into the memories of a generation of moviegoers. Realistically, their characters wouldn’t look or act like how we remember them, no more than your typical 50 year old looks or acts their 20-year-old selves. As an audience, we kind of know that, but we kind of don’t. Because if Ford isn’t wearing a vest and red-stripe pants, flying the Millennium Falcon, jabbing with Chewbacca, shooting first and being a smart-mouthed bad ass, he just isn’t Han Solo. But that would be like your dad walking around in 2013 wearing acid jeans, partying with his old college roommate and driving a Trans Am. If you thought it was rough sledding watching Ford try to recapture Indiana Jones in Crystal Skull, that performance was, by comparison, “only” 19 years after the release of Last Crusade. In other words: There is something to be said for preserving the memory of the original characters rather than stretching to recapture a magic moment in time."

I guess I'm the only one who paid attention when Hamill said "they're [Disney] talking to us," while also saying that "if we cannot return, they'll write us out." That means if they can just be "written out," that they're secondary characters. Think of Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek 2009.

"It’s been 30 years since we last saw Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia in Return of the Jedi. The trio were youthful, attractive and iconic figures who were branded into the memories of a generation of moviegoers. Realistically, their characters wouldn’t look or act like how we remember them, no more than your typical 50 year old looks or acts their 20-year-old selves. As an audience, we kind of know that, but we kind of don’t. Because if Ford isn’t wearing a vest and red-stripe pants, flying the Millennium Falcon, jabbing with Chewbacca, shooting first and being a smart-mouthed bad ass, he just isn’t Han Solo. But that would be like your dad walking around in 2013 wearing acid jeans, partying with his old college roommate and driving a Trans Am. If you thought it was rough sledding watching Ford try to recapture Indiana Jones in Crystal Skull, that performance was, by comparison, “only” 19 years after the release of Last Crusade. In other words: There is something to be said for preserving the memory of the original characters rather than stretching to recapture a magic moment in time."

I guess I'm the only one who paid attention when Hamill said "they're [Disney] talking to us," while also saying that "if we cannot return, they'll write us out." That means if they can just be "written out," that they're secondary characters. Think of Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek 2009.

For some reason I kinda agree to an extent. I mean no way will it be exactly the same and people memories will probably change cause seeing your childhood icons well...not beautiful and active like they used to be..might be a bit eye opening for some. The harsh realizations that characters age *sometimes some more gracefully than others* might be diffucult for some to accept especially when we want to see them being all ass-kicking, and such. If done well, seeing them back could definitly be something magical and nostalgic, if not then it could just leave us wishing for the old days again and getting depressed over the fact that there is no way we can fully reclaim our childhoods. They really need to get this right because if they mess it up, then well...the internet might break.

Agreed, the return of the Big Three could be great, but it is NOT automatically a great thing the way many seem to assume it will be. In other words, they need to be very careful to do this right with them in there; it makes the entire exercise a greater gamble, which is ironic because many seem to think (hopefully not Disney and LFL) that having them in there makes it less of a gamble and more of a "sure thing". So I think there is something to what Whedon is saying there, albeit a bit harshly... but I also agree with
@KED12345 that it really seems to be the case that they will have secondary roles, and that should lessen the risk. And all in all, I am optimistic that great care is being taken with all of this.

Agreed, the return of the Big Three could be great, but it is NOT automatically a great thing the way many seem to assume it will be. In other words, they need to be very careful to do this right with them in there; it makes the entire exercise a greater gamble, which is ironic because many seem to think (hopefully not Disney and LFL) that having them in there makes it less of a gamble and more of a "sure thing". So I think there is something to what Whedon is saying there, albeit a bit harshly... but I also agree with
@KED12345 that it really seems to be the case that they will have secondary roles, and that should lessen the risk. And all in all, I am optimistic that great care is being taken with all of this.

Sad thing is that while that might happen....I have this feeling that some fans wont like the reality of that. Sure they say they want them as supporting, but I worry some might not like the reality of seeing your childhood characters pushed aside for new people. Main roles and supporting roles are definitly risks. Main cause if they come off as people trying desperatly to be like the past/just can't give good performances/unable to garner in the younger audiences who dont know/care that they are from the original trilogy then your trilogy is skrewed. but if they are supporting then some fans/audiences will be pissed off that the OT cast aren't the center of this new story/action like they wanted *I can definitly see a complaint being "I dont care about who these new kids are...I just want my old ones!". Both have risks and is going to be a hard thing to pull off especially if lets say your OT actors can't pull off the things we want them to be/do.